Skip to Content


First the commercial establishments on CMH Road raised their voices, then on Raj Kumar Road. Most of the residents in Vijayanagar were mute and raised no voice. Avenue Road does not like the idea. It will soon be Vidhana Soudha, High Court and Minsk Square that will get altered. KSCA, though unhappy is not worried much since it is quite sometime that they stopped promoting cricket. And now we are on the verge of pushing a part of Lalbagh and the verdant Lakshman Rau Boulevard as part of history. It is really heartening to see people up against the adamant BMRCL which has not been conducting in an undemocratic manner. The wannabe Parliamentarians have had their voices heard too, some reliable some to be trashed instantaneously. I really wonder, what stops BMRCL to go back to the drawing board. Yes, there will be a delay, but let them not forget that any number of BMRCLs can be created, but cannot create one bit of Lakshman Rao Boulevard or Lalbagh. And what approvals are we talking about? It is from our own State and the Union Govt!

A lot could be written to make BMRCL and the Governments understand that they are building the METRO for the people of Bangalore. But it is time that they shed their arrogant behaviour and talk to the people and make NAMMA METRO really count.  The often heard ‘…not possible at this stage…’ is not acceptable.

This is one thought provoking suggestion on Hasiru Usiru mailing list by Mr.Nityananda…

‘…all ideas of what to do about the 4th Main (Nanda Rd) when the Metro is built have failed. Going underground is too costly. Going overhead involves cutting almost all the trees. Changing the alignment will involve too much take over of private land.

Here is a RADICAL possibility which I hope can be considered

-Retain the present alignment as it is the logical one requiring no land acquisition, and gives best service to BOTH Jayanagar and Banashankari residents.


-The trains will not therefore be obstructed by the overhanging branches of the giant trees on 4th Main.

-The added cost of going underground is SAVED.

-The cost and time of overhead viaduct is also saved

-Run the power high voltage rail at ground level on this stretch as in Britain.

-WORLD CLASS ARCHITECTS can design the Jayanagar station to have a rural look and feel at ground level WITHOUT cutting any trees. In fact the tree trunks will be an integral part of the station, just like at any village stn in India!

-Residents of Bangalore voluntarily give up the 4th Main for use by cars / buses / bikes and dedicate this stretch to the preservation of India's environment - giving an example to all of India.

-Road traffic can still be given a few East- West crossings UNDER the Metro tracks at say 27th , 36th and 40th Crosses. This could be funded from the amount saved above.

Hope the BMRCL will suitably respond, as this meets all their technical needs and we ask only the residents of Bangalore to sacrifice a small 2.5 Km stretch of road and we ask nothing of the BMRCL, except some small use of the imagination and a little sensitivity to the environment…’

idontspam's picture

I like the idea

It is not radical at all. It is logical I would think. Let us make this a PT only street. Magic box can be used to go under.But does this prevent the trees at lalbagh being chopped?

If only this was light rail we could have used the road for normal traffic also since it doesnt use a third rail.

Vasanth's picture

I liked it too

I liked this idea too. I daily cross the Nanda Road and this thought had come in my mind. There are service roads to serve the residents and for main traffic there is Kanakapura Road 2 blocks away and KR Road 3 blocks away towards West.

On the Jayanagar side too (towards East), there are underutilized wide residential roads.

Service roads should be made one way in each direction.

Cost saving of nearly 300-400 crores as well as trees and quicker implementation.


das's picture

Out of the box thinking

Whenever one thinks of Bangalore Metro, one always thinks of Above ground or Underground. How come nobody till Mr. Nityananda thought of At ground ?

The practicalities will have to be studied in depth of course, but at least it's a new idea.

idontspam's picture

We have been!

How come nobody till Mr. Nityananda thought of At ground ?

We at Praja have been discussing that option since ages... please look up the archives. I will post them here if I find those threads.

s_yajaman's picture

More thoughts

Always wonder why Metros run as high as they do.  

At grade in residential areas is going to be tough.  Third rail is a touchy issue (pun not intended).  We will have to fence off the route.  At critical cross roads (27th cross/ Diagonal Road/36th cross/38th cross/40th cross have pre-cast underpasses cutting across.   WIll be great if we can create Bangalore's first pedstrian+Metro only road.  As said above there are plenty of roads  to use in Jayanagar as alternatives.   Most buses on this stretch to KBS and KR Market.  WIth NM going there - buses should run EW to feed NM rather than run to KBS and KR Market.

One more option is to go only high as needed.  The Metro pillars seem too high (and I am no civil engineer).  No double deckers ply on Nanda Road.  A bus is 10 ft high. Why do we need to go higher than this for the bottom of the spans?  It will save costs as well.   Will this save trees?


Drive safe.  It is not just the car maker which can recall its product.

idontspam's picture

At grade options

In most train related threads somebody invariably proposes an at grade option which is discussed.

1. This is one such thread which discuss an at grade high volume people mover

2. This is another thread which discusses at grade for HSRL, Metro and CRS

3. One more thread


das's picture

That so ? Great !

The big metros abroad come to ground level (from below ground) when they exit from the core city and enter the suburbs. In fact I don't think I've seen a single elevated metro in the core ctiy anywhere, except in Delhi and Bangalore.

murali772's picture

indeed a win-win


Thanks for posting this. The moment I read Nityananada's posting on HU, the proposal struck me as a win-win for everyone concerned. Anyway, we need to move towards curbing usage of personalised forms of transport, and this could be an added step in that direction.

Besides, I can't see why BMRCL should have any issue with it. As such, the present confrontation can also be avoided.

Muralidhar Rao

Muralidhar Rao
blrsri's picture

was it cutting or pruning?

All the while I was under the notion that they are going to trim the trees only and make space in the middle as the pillars are on the median of nanda road..the trees are atleast 30-40 ft from the median..

This is more like making space as much needed for the metro and leave the rest untouched..more like a haircut for the canopy types!

Now there is a talk of 200+ trees being cut..are we missing something !!

deponti's picture

This seems to be a good

This seems to be a good solution, but there might be some political reasons/financial reasons why such sensible solutions are not taken up....

Alas, in all my interactions with the members of the Empowered Committee members, I have found most of them to be domineering, sneering at our solutions, and possessing a mindcast set in concrete.

I do hope that they are *forced* to see some sense, before they destroy, utterly, what cannot be re-created.
Srivatsava's picture

Good... but may not be...

Yes,   A PT only road is a good idea at first look.

    The ground level Metro lines and the barricades can be the wide-median of the road. Additionally, we have a 1+1 lane road to carry buses only. Considering that very few buses ply on the road, we could consider allowing even autos/taxis and even private buses to ply on the road.

     As suggested here, we should have underpasses at 28th crs, 32nd cross, 36th crs , 38th crs , etc.. But there are certain practical issues. Underpasses here will mean expanding the roads at these junctions, to allow for right and left turns from the cross roads. That will take a few trees off.

    Next we need to build bus bays for bus stops. THese bus stops then eat into the footpath space. To avoid that, we need to cut a few trees to create the bus bays.

    Crossing the Nanda road: To cross the road ( and a metro line) we need to put up pedestrian underpasses or skywalks. The entry/exit ramps will take a lot of space, and again eat into the pedestrian space.

     And why do you want to create so much of pedestrian space there? what is the amount of peedestrians there? Minimal, since there are very few commertial establishments or educational institutions (except NMKRV).

    Forgot the metro stations; They also need space, so allow a few more trees to be cut.

     the metro track itself cannot be a steep ramp. Since the metro is elevated till South end, it needs atleast 150-200m to ramp down to ground and another 200-300mts on the other end near Rajalakshmi. Also, unlike near South end, on the other end of the road the metro has to turn left and hence it needs more space there are a few trees to be cut.

    So, I would count that there will be little saving in the number of trees cut. Also, I may have left out several other things. Maybe some sewage and water lines to be shifted for building the underpasses and hence the need to cut trees around these lines!! May be some more to install electrial transformers nearby!!

  Simply put, the idea looks fine. But I believe, its not worth to bring the mtero to ground only for one station!!


-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

vinay_sreenivasa's picture

Hi All, I'm Vinay, just

Hi All,

I'm Vinay, just joined Praja. Really useeful discussion here, thanks. Was just going through the earlier discussions on Mono, LRT etc.

@ blrsri
the trees that will get cut are for the station - 2 of them on nanda road. for the actual movement of the train itself they are saying they might not cut any trees, but im not too sure we can trust them.and the rti response from them said 323, now they're saying they;ll just cut 210..who knows what number they actually want.

BTW, BMRCL has claimed that they held 4 presenttations with residents of Jayanagar, some years back on the metro route alignment. Anyone here been part of those discussions?

idontspam's picture

Conclusion not appropriate

Simply put, the idea looks fine. But I believe, its not worth to bring the mtero to ground only for one station!!

This conclusion of yours is because of your "ADDITIONAL" cherries and icings you have suggested

Additionally, we have a 1+1 lane road to carry buses only. Considering that very few buses ply on the road, we could consider allowing even autos/taxis and even private buses to ply on the road..

Srivatsava's picture

IDS, consider the metro only..


      You seem to suggest that that having only a single lane for buses on an existing 2+2 lane road are "addtional cherries and icings". Should I then understand that this road is to be used for metro only and absolutely no vehicles?

      My friend, the very fact that a Metro rail is aligned on this road points to the importance of the road. We cannot 'ban' vehicles' on this road. Its not about providing alternative road space elsewehere. The point is that this is a trunk road and a thoroughfare, connecting two very important points - south end circle to a ring road.

Btw, lets consider only the metro.....

       The length of the said is about 2 km, from South end circle to Rajalakshmi Hospital. This stretch has 3 stations -South end, Jayanagar and RV road (previously terminus). I am not aware of the location of South end station. Even if I assume that the station is in front of bangalore hospital, there are two stations in the said stretch. 

      Now, the metro has to be completely elevated all over South end circle and should remain so for another 50 m. Then, if it starts ramping down to ground level, it needs another 300m. So, you lose the first 350 mts. 

     The RV road station is about 100 mts from the Rajalakshmi Hospital end. It cant be pushed any closer to the junction, since the metro has to turn left at the junction. And this station has to be elevated, since the station is too close to the junction. And another 300mts is lost on this side for the metro line to be ramped from ground to a height of about 20ft. That is about 400-450mts lost on this end of the road. 

     So, together its a distance of about 750-800 mts, leaving only 1-1.1km ground level travel. And this is assuming that the South end station is not the 'tree-lined' Nanda road, but on RV road,  in front of Bangalore hospital/sonata software. Someone please confirm the correct location of the Southend station. 

     Next comes the underpasses to cross the roads at  27th Crs, 30th crs, 32rd Crs, 36th cross and 38th cross. All of these junctions ( not roads) have to be widened to put up the 'small boxes' that you have always ridiculed!! Each of those widening will take away a few trees. Even when those boxes are put up, vehicles from the service road (nanda road has wonderful service roads) will not be able to enter the underpass, for the distance between the service road and nanda road is too little for the ramps of the underpass. So, the service roads are effectively turned into 'footpaths'!!

    Add to this, the Jayanagar station. Again I am not aware of the exact location. I guess its closer to 30th/32nd cross. That will need some trees to be cut. Effective lenght of the station is atleast 50 mts. And the no tree zone for the underpasses at each junction is also about 40-50 mts. Five underpasses is about 200mts.

   So of the 1-1.1 km metro on ground, you have a 'no-tree zone' for 200mts of underpass/junction and another 50 mts around the station (I am counting only the Jayanagar station; the RV road station has already been taken into account). So, effctively we may be having trees in only 700mts of the 2km road!!

-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

Srivatsava's picture

NO further pedestrians!!

   By making this a PT only road, can we expect a considerable increasee in pedestrians on this road? At present there are very few pedestrians on Nanda road. there are few on the service road and the cross roads. The good thing is that there are very few business establishments in the vicinity to attract large numbers of pedestrians. This is not Jayanagar 4th Block/ Shopping Complex area!!

  With this background, can you justify the need for further pedestrian maenities on this road? This road has had a decent footpath for ages!!


-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

Srivatsava's picture

Complete picture important!! wahts HU's locus standi??

I am surprised that so many people are 'mesmerised' by the presentations of  Hasiru-Usiru. I have no disrespect for them; but they are just another forum, like Praja, with a particular focus. While Praja looks at civic issues, HU pursues green matters. I can understand that they are well informed about their cause.

     That does not make them 'expects' to build/design a metro rail !! Already, their one proposal to take the metro underground has been ridiculed (although not with comtepmt ) by BMRC as against the cause of saving trees. Now comes the proposal to run the metro on ground. have they made a comprehensive analysis? Or is it going to be another 'proposal' that is deemed 'fundamentally flawed'??

     I, being no expert, have raised some practicality issues. There are possibly more issues that are missed out - like storm water drains, water and sanitary lines, electricity lines, street lights etc. A 'simple' solution like banning all vehicles is not the answer. If you start banning all vehicles, how can you even provide proper feeder services to the metro. And Jayanagar and BSK are large localities for the metro to ignore....

-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

idontspam's picture


 By making this a PT only road, can we expect a considerable increasee in pedestrians on this road?... can you justify the need for further pedestrian maenities on this road? This road has had a decent footpath for ages!!

There is going to be a metro line & station there whether you like it or not. So the same count of people will exist at whatever grade you want to build. All I am saying is take the road and build metro at grade. The traffic can be diverted to side roads. Nothing more complicated than that. So I am not proposing "further pedestrian amenities" like building extra footpaths etc. 

But for arguments sake it is possible easily to increase foot falls to the area by making the station have a mall shops etc, but thats beside my point. At grade stations are easier on both purse and legs. No need for escalators stairs etc. less concrete.

BMRC have only disputed building underground to save lalbagh not said anything about the Nanda road per se. At grade is conviniently ignored in discussions. Somehow metro is expected to only be up above or down under never at grade.

idontspam's picture

Good analysis

So, effctively we may be having trees in only 700mts of the 2km road!!

This is good analysis. If BMRC can show many trees we can save by going underground, at grade and overhead, it will help people understand that One there was a proper cost benefit done to arrive at the decision. Two there is transperency in this and that there was attempts made to save the environment.

blrsri's picture

how does it differ with v.soudha?

 If vidhana soudha can have the metro older heritage site like lalbaugh cannot?

Isnt lalbaugh our history? isnt it as valuable..if not more?

On the same lines..isnt nanda road our heritage too?

Srivatsava's picture

Lalbagh, Vidhana Soudha and Nanda rd...


     Vidhana soudha, Lalbagh and Nanda are all completely different.

Vidhana Soudha is part of the CBD. The metro is underground in the complete CBD, not only for Vidhana soudha....

but, expecting metro to go underground for just one station (or half a km ) is absurd. Hence, BMRC SHOULD NOT agree to run the metro underground only near Lalbagh. Also, the 'Save Lalbagh' is too much of a exgageration. Its not as if lalbagh is being taken over for metro. Its just a very small part of Labagh (< 1% of lalbagh). I am sure somebody is intentionally creating nuisance. And a lot of people have foolishly started to believe that lalbagh is being destroyed!!

     Nanda is completely different. Its just a road and the trees there are road-side ones. But lalbagh is a park and is governed by completely different laws. Btw, there is no absolutely heritage associated with Nanda road. And there is definately no heritage with the aquired portion of Lalbagh, the heritage aspects are deep and safe inside!!

-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

blrsri's picture

what cbd..?


so MG road is not cbd? why is metro on pillars there?

i dont know if you have seen the damage to lalbagh in person..the place thats encrached is where praja held its monthly  meetings till recently..surrounded by tall old trees...

theres actually a parks act protecting it..however the authrities worked around that..just like many other projects..

I am not against the metro..but lets not do a carnage in the name of it..

Srivatsava's picture

Exactly the point I made...

i dont know if you have seen the damage to lalbagh in person..the place thats encrached is where praja held its monthly  meetings till recently..surrounded by tall old trees..

but lets not do a carnage in the name of it..

  blrsri, This is exactly the point I made. It is just the place where about 10-15 people could meet for an hour or two .  Its not the size of a Tata Nano production plant!!. The <1200sq mts of aquired land is a minscule 0.1% of the total area of lalbagh (1 million sq mts).  
    That cannot be termed 'carnage' my friend... plz look into the meaning of the word in an english dictionary!!   This is exactly what I said when I wrote that " the  'Save Lalbagh' is too much of a exgageration".....

On a lighter note,  The main heritage aspect of the aquired portion of the lalbagh is that two Praja meetings were held!! How abt us filing a case against BMRCL accusing them of enroaching our land??

-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

blrsri's picture

not just the size of land..

 again srivastava, its not just the size..

this will set a precedence to other so called 'projects' to take away parks or parts of it..

what if they next sink a borewell and suck up all the water in the lalbagh lake? or ..citing another example..say what abt the HSRL to the airport start from cubbon park instead? afterall its not greater than lalbagh!

a very deplorable example to the broken window theory..very unfortunate!

vinay_sreenivasa's picture

@srivtasava - abt HU's locus standi and other issues

abt HU's locus standi - we never said we are the best people to give solutions or that what we suggest should be accepted:-) we're just throwing up various alternatives. the main thing we're saying is that the metro alignment was done without public consultations. And once publci consultations happen, various people will come up with various suggestions (like it happens here), technical experst can give their inputs and then people can choose what they want. our objection is to a lack of public consultation.

As for your point that only a small portion of Laslbagh is going away, i'd like to repeat what blrsri said - this sets a bad precedent. Lalbagh has never been touched. The government is supposed to be the custodian of public spaces, not the one who gives them away. The manner in which this was done is worse. Instead of moving a bikll in the assembly to change the act protecting lalbagh, the government avoided all debate and discussion, by bringing this change through an ordinance. Once Lalbagh is touched for one project, who knows what will happen next. tomorrow someone will argue that they need to build a TTMC inside lalbagh and say its in public interest and so on and so forth.

I was also quite surprised to see you say that Nanda Road is not heritage. Is heritage supposed to be only old buildings and forts etc? A road with 2.2 km of canopy and boulevards on both sides - is it not the living heritage of bangalore? and even otherwise, dont you see the benefecial impact of those number of trees on the micro-climate or the fact that these boulevards are affordable, public spaces for people of all ages, communities, class? even if you do not see value, there are many others who do - and our argument is that their opinion needs to be considered and was not considered.

Naveen's picture

Srivatsava Does Have a Point....

I think Srivatsava has a point when he says that the nett length of the tracks laid on the surface will be well short of the total length of Nanda rd, as already explained by him.

The South-end station will be coming up before the junction on RV rd (opp Bangalore hospital). In any case, the tracks can ramp down only after the South-end junction & again, it has to ramp up before the turn at the end at Rajalaxmi Nursing home. Hence, RV rd station will need to be elevated if it has to be as close as possible to the end, & hence, the ramping up will have to be before RV station. All this will considerably reduce the length over which the tracks can be retained on the surface.

However, if rail tracks are laid on the road surface & vehicles are banned on the street, there should be ample width (the road is 4-laned) for arranging pedestrian tracks, bicycle tracks, as also to comfortably accommodate the intermediate Jayanagar station on the surface. In fact, there may be scope to widen the pedestrian sidewalks ! Some positive benefits, after all !!

Positioning underpasses at the various intersections to allow vehicle movements below the tracks may consume some of the park area/s only during the construction phase. Additional widths for arranging lanes for left /right turns will not be necessary as traffic will in any case, not be permitted on Nanda rd.

The area taken up by BMRCL for Lalbagh station is only to an extent of some 1300 sq.mtrs - negligible in comparison with the whole area of Lalbagh (some 230 acres).

As I mentioned on another thread, I think BMRCL has blindly accepted DMRC's DPR reports for the alignments without considering ground realities & do not seem to have made any adjustments to take care of sensitivities. Not much priority has been accorded to preservation of as much of the city's heritage as is possible - MG rd & Nanda rd are two glaring examples.

Srivatsava's picture

Precedents, HU and Nanda road

blr_sri, vinay,

       You are arguing that allowing the metro to utilise the lalbagh land will set a wrong precedent!! And also presenteed your apprehensions about the future - as in the HSRL from Cubbon road and a TTMC at Lalbagh. But this is not the first time that park land has been used.  Metro is an 'eco-friendly' project, capable of reducing about half of the citys emissions. And this project is now 'eating up' 19 trees (mainly eucalyptus??).

      Unfortunately, when the precedents were set for 'grabbing/utilising' parks for other purposes much before i was born!! All of the 'developments' on one side of Kasturba road are 'worse precedents'.  Surely, a tennis stadium, a stinking and unused aquarium is not for a public cause. But these have been allowed. I cant have a very bad opinion about a science center and a art gallery. So, precedents have been set and not being set today!!

     Abt the use of ordinance, I dont want to sound like a govt spokesperson, but a ordinance is a legal option, with a 'validity' of 6 months. And if someone believes law ( of issuing ordinance) has been misused, it should be fought in a court of law. Making emotional slogan and cries, misleading people with wrong information/possible further execess will only hamper the 'patronage' of metro, but will definately not help in cause of 'regaining' the lost part of lalbagh.

My comment on HU's locus standi: I have clearly mentioned that HU may have 'eco-experts', but definately not ones to design metro rail within a day. I wrote 

 is it going to be another 'proposal' that is deemed 'fundamentally flawed'??

 with a concern that HU's second proposal may again be ridiculed by BMRC as being flawed. the point I made was about how HU was in a hurry to suggest the alternative without taking a complete picture of all the pros and cons. Have you within HU made a discussion on this? or is that one persons proposal has been 'completely accpeted' as a viable alternative?

    BMRC says they have made three public meetings in Jayanagar. but did HU have to wait for BMRC to consult public? That a part of lalbagh would be used for metro is as old a news as the metro and hence, If you had real honest intensions, 

  1. Have you written any letters to BMRC asking them for specific details, proposing alternatives?
  2. If BMRC was not co-operative in their replies, have to used the RTI route?
  3. Why have you approached the court all these days? there have been several cases against BBMP on road widening, why not plan similar moves?
  4. Why now and why not before??

      these are all questions that you need to answer, before you approach a court. IMO, only a court can 'appreciate' your cause, not BMRC, not the govt........ (and certainly not me!!)

-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

Srivatsava's picture

Real alternative...

     Nanda road is too wonderful, and too important a road to be banned for vehicles. The real alternative lies 30ft on either side of Nanda road.

     All along the road, there is a 'park' till the service road, a width of abt 30ft ( or is it more??) both sides. Presently, there is only grass all around with a tree trown here and there, and walking tracks on some parts. The only utility of this grass is to reduce erosion of soil, where is little erosion. 

    Instead, why cant we allow BMRC to take off all the road-side trees and let them construct the metro. When BMRC is done with, we can have straight growing Ashoka trees planted on the edges of the road. The giant trees can be translocated to this 'park'. There is enough space in these parks to house double the number of trees on Nanda road.

Another possibility was suggested by prof Ashwin Mahesh during the big10 meet at IIM last month. The walking tracks in the park run all along the  2km road. they can also act as additional footpath to the pedestrians. further, during the consrtuction of metro, the BMRC/BBMP can even takeover the Nanda road footpath and hence augment the roadspace for the motorists.

   To put it differently, when you have a excellent wide road, with neat service road and ample land in between them, the possibilities are immense.  Lets make it a better road for all users, without 'any (long term)' damage to environment. 


-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

s_yajaman's picture

Adding fuel to fire

@Srivastava - I think some of the park space is also going for Metro construction.  There are also trees planted in much of that park area.  Also - two wrongs don't make a right ; just because park space was previously encroached does not make it right now. 

@Vinay - sorry but you guys woke up but far too late.  This alignment was fixed 2 years back.  Now that the action has started the truth hits.  What we need to do is to nail BMRCL on

a. get from them which trees are facing the axe.  How many.  Colour code them and the area next to it so that we know if a tree is missing it is of the right category

b. Which trees have been marked for pruning.  How much will be pruned?  Colour coded

c. The date on which cutting/pruning will happen.   is this as late as possible?  On that date we will show up to ensure only those trees are being cut. 

d. the details of saplings that have been planted

e. Force the govt to convert more open space (Race Course, inside lal bagh) to forest area.

I personally think that the routing should have been along Elephant Rock Road and on to the TTMC at Jayanagar and stop there.  As usual the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.  Now BMRCL claims they are only an SPV implementing a civil construction project and not a mass transport project whose job it is to attract maximum commuters and reduce congestion in the city.  And so they don't coordinate with BBMP, BMTC or BTP. 






Drive safe.  It is not just the car maker which can recall its product.

Srivatsava's picture

dousing the fire!!

two wrongs don't make a right ; just because park space was previously encroached does not make it right now

No SY, I am not saying that using lalbagh land for metro is correct. Plz let me know if I said so. What I rather said was that this was not setting a bad precedent, and worse precedents have already been set to 'destroy/utilise' park land. 

   My grievenge against HU is not about registering protests; I am glad they are doing it. But their goal should not be to de-rail Metro, an eco-friendly development. Rather, their objective should be to use this an excuse/alibi to gain a good amount of land inside lalbagh, so that they can plant 190 or 1900 trees as replacement for 19 that have been felled.

      That is where I differ with bodies like HU/ Saldhan's group etc. Their objective should not be to stall projects. We have seen that the BBMP has been adament about carrying on with the planned widening. What have these organisations leant from their failures against the BBMP? Or are they in the belief that being a roadblock, delaying some of these widening, being considered as nuisance by BBMP/BMRC as their sucess?? I am afraid that its another group (HU) that is now failing to another project (Metro).


-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

vinay_sreenivasa's picture

response to srivatsava's queries


here are the anwers to your questions -

>>Have you written any letters to BMRC asking them for specific details, proposing alternatives?
The blue prints have never been made available. Only the route map was made available.
As for suggesting alternatives, HU has been part of numerous meetings as part of the yalappa reddy committee meetings where aletrnatives were dsicussed as also in a meeting with Madhu, the earlier MD of BMRCL 

>>If BMRC was not co-operative in their replies, have to used the RTI route?
RTI route was used and only then we got to know the exact number of trees that will go. RTI has also been asked about details of alternatives considered, for which they only said 'see DPR'. And when i asked for DPR, they asked me to file another RTI!  I have filed one more and now they have said we're printing, wait for it!

>>Why have you approached the court all these days? there have been several cases against BBMP on road widening, why not plan similar moves?
BMRCL is a respondent in the case where road widening is also discussed. BMRCL lawyers have been attending all the hearings. A judgement was given on March 16th where BMRCL has also been asked to follow the law - the karnataka town and country planning act. Now a legal notice has been sent to BMRCL for violating the above law.

>>Why now and why not before??
There have been two protests even as recent as November alone last year, joined by three MLAs. There have been tens of meetings on this issue with officials and Yelappa REddy committee.  There have also been PIL initiatives.

Our objective is not to stall or derail the metro or the road-widening case. our objective is to ensure that the right process , the laws are followed for these projects. that publc consultations are done, that BDA which is the planning agency for bangalore prepares a scheme, and these agencies implement it accordingly.

as for the bad precedent part -,we're saying the asme thing - look at cubbon park - it has got screwed because it started getting used for various items. we dont want that to happen to lalbagh.

silkboard's picture

Can we force carbon offsets in public projects?

Not saying that trees aren't important. I have been silent because I am lost. Part of me wants to say why are the greens late on this. The other part knows that unless you protest, perhaps BMRCL and government doesn't listen.

The reality may have been like this. BMRCL thought Kanakpura Road (with businesses around it) may see more litigations than Nanda Road (no houses or businesses around it). The hard truth is that we all want Metro like projects to happen one road away from our individual houses, not right next to our houses. CMH road is an example of that.

Anyway. Instead of forcing a stalemate here, can we convert the battle for trees into a war for forests? Does this green battle have to be so localized? Can we :make use" Metro's environmental hardships in another way?

  • The total of 1300 trees that Metro's South alignment may impact (just heard this number from someone, may not be right, please don't pick on it), would offset about 60 tonnes of CO2 over 50 years. (roughly speaking)
  • Can we demand equal offset initiatives elsewhere in the city?

Basically, can we force BMRCL to buy carbon credits sourced from within the city to make up for the lost Carbon offset due to impacted trees? Things like:

  • Equivalent parks - Challaghatta Valley (an old dream of some of us), or Race Course area (soon to be vacated)
  • A new green belt around Bangalore, locked for a few decades?
  • Eco friendly material in building their stations
  • Use of renewable energy to power their operating centers and stations.

Can't readily think of ideas for BMRC or state government to buy Carbon offsets, but there would be more. But the point I am making is this.

  • If we force all projects to factor in the Carbon costs in their plans, the economics may make them consider the most "sustainbale" options. All this late stage chaos and battle for a tree here and another one there may get a little more managable.
  • Like in this case, the cost of buying carbon offsets, either via carbon credits from open market, or via other actions that will create the offsets could make BMRCL think of realignment or other options.

Thinking out of the box and aloud, hope I made some sense.

blrsri's picture

why two stops on Nanda road?

 There are proposed two stops for the metro on Nanda road..

1. Just before 30th Cross

2. After 38th Cross

This was probably the plan before the extension of routes on the south corridor to we still need the two stops? we can see the distance is hardly 8 crosses apart..thats close to less than a Km apart!

It made sense when metro was terminiating at the end of RV road but not now..

How about having one stop btwn 30th and 33rd cross instead?

Naveen's picture

Metro Alignment Dwgs Were Available Earlier


I agree with you that the DPR (prepared by DMRC) had been accepted without any attempts or alterations to save heritage spots such as MG rd boulevard, Nanda rd & Lalbagh.

However, BMRCL had posted the DPR alignment details for Ph-1 right at the start over two years ago. After the extension was announced, they had again posted details of the extension. Hence, your statement - "The blue prints have never been made available. Only the route map was made available" is incorrect, I'm afraid !



I agree with you that the greens have been late & should have acted much earlier, especially with BMRCL having made public their drawings. I also agree that other alternatives must be explored to restore the lost trees & greenery as you suggest instead of stone-walling progress on Metro construction, which is already behind schedule now. Such moves will cause much more inconvenience to public.



1) Jayanagar station will be adjacent & just after 30th cross - on the southern side (not before as you mentioned). 30th cross is the closest from Jayanagar shopping complex & the TTMC being built. This was probably why this location was chosen for the station, & it is also between 30th & 33rd cross, though it does not extend till 33rd cross.

2) RV rd station was planned larger (with huge parking facilities), adjacent 40th cross & extending northwards till past 38th cross, but this may have been changed now with smaller length & reduction in parking space, after track extension till Puttenahalli.

The distance between these two stations is 850 mtrs !

The next station is at Banashankari (past Uttarahalli rd), which will be about 1200 mtrs from RV rd station. Hence, there is a need for a station between Jayanagar & Banashankari stns as the distance between them is too large (over 2 km).

Srivatsava's picture

Carbon offests..


Our objective is not to stall or derail the metro or the road-widening case. our objective is to ensure that the right process , the laws are followed for these projects. that publc consultations are done, that BDA which is the planning agency for bangalore prepares a scheme, and these agencies implement it accordingly.

       Firstly, many thanks for giving your response. I understand you have put a lot of sustained effort for a long time. I wish you will see success in the future!!

     My concern against HU (or any other green group) has been vindicated by you. Your focus, as you have said, is on compliance with law, while implementing these projects. You and I know the law well and hence we try to judge the extent of compliance by BMRC/BBMP. They (BMRC/BBMP) are one step ahead of ordinary souls like us. they not only have knowledge of the law, but also have immense knowledge of 'successfully' working around the 'restrictions' in law. 

    Even if you one day find success in your objectives, you will only ensure that the present laws prevail. That is not enough for us. Metro will happen despite any form of opposition. I do concede that there are excesses by the civic bodies. They may start cutting trees even before they get the permission from all quarters. They may fell a few more trees than what is permitted. Afterall, they are like us. We citizens make 'building violations', they make 'demolition violations'!!!

    Change/extend the focus of your protests to include some of the following points. I am trying to put forth some points that have been discussed on Praja recently

  1. Alternative to tree 'cutting'   has an interesting stat that you can use during your protest. 

Metro Costs us tens of thousands of crores. If we can move a thousand trees at a cost of 1 lakh a piece, it will cost us just around 10 cr.

Strive to relocate tress within the vicinity. Not all of those trees may do well. But, we should also be able to contribute trees/saplings or even expect BMRC to bear the cost. It doesn’t bloat their budget!

  1. Can we force carbon offsets in public projects?  (on this post)  suggests a more flexible approach. The funda is that loss of trees doesn’t have to compensated with trees themselves.   The post suggests some alternatives. Please try and see if these can be accommodated  in  your objectives.

You have got great organisational skills and if you put them to use in directions as mentioned above (not specifically these, but this direction), you have an additional person joining you in  your endevour!!


MY support will not necessarily be to 'enforcing' every rule, but to enforce the 'spirit'  of the rule and the  reasoning behind it.

-Srivatsava V


-Srivatsava V

vinay_sreenivasa's picture

response to srivtasava and naveen


I think we have different approaches and thoughts , but one thing for sure is , this is a good space to debate and discuss:-) . You guys at Praja make me think and re-visit my positions and thoughts.

There have been various alternatives suggested to tree-cutting and suggestions about carbon offsets etc. And many of these may be suggestions which should be/will be taken up. Now if one thread in Praja can get so many thoughts and alternatives in, imagine the sort of solutions/ideas we would have got if we had public consultations? And its not just the number of ideas , its the fact that we are all deciding our future ourselves instead of someone else deciding for us.

At HU, we are not putting one solution ahead of another. Our stand is that we want them to have public consultations and then see if we can save Nanda Road and Lalbagh. When we do those consultations various thoughts will come up - some might say its ok to cut those trees as long as we replant elsewhere, some will say we cannot cut it , it impacts the micro-climate, some will say transplant the trees to the same locality on different roads etc.

We want them to follow the law in spirit too..not just letter:-) thats why we want them to hold public consultations. The Karnataka town and country planning act is a real good policy - it allows for public consultaions, it streamlines planning. Why cant they follow it for all urban projects? Not just metro - if they started folllowing it for all other projects too, we would have a better city right? That's why we are fighting to get the law implemented. just yesterday we gor response for an RTI from BDA  - they are saying they have no knowledge of whether BBMPs road widening project has followed planning norms, CDP etc.

As for the carbon offsets - its good, we need them to do it, but only when all other options are exhausted. Otherwise it will become like carbon credits trading - something which looks good on the surface but is really bad. With carbon credits, polluting industries continue to pollute while just buying carbon credits. Similalrly if carbon offsets are not carefully used, they will just go ahead and destroy much more, saying they will offset it elsewhere.

and for re-planting of trees - we offered to do a joint inspection with them of all the replanting they said they did, and they wouldnt committ!

Anyways, the key again is - consult the public. Once the method of governance is sorted out, all these various other issues get sorted out.

I may be wrong and some blue-prints may have been shared. I still think we dont have all the data that needs to be out in public. I will however check and get back to you.

we will in all probablities be organizing a public consultation for the Metro Southern reach soon . Will post the news on Praja and you guys can come and participate too. There are some really good ideas here which can be discussed in a wider forum.

Srivatsava's picture

tone of discussion

This thread, atleast for me, has moved from a seeemigly-confrontanist & seemingly violent tone to a seemingly-agreement tone. Yes, indeed there is a variety of ideas here and I would be happy if you can utilise any of the perspectives from Praja.

   I have sent you a private message, requesting for contact details. Please take a look.

-Srivatsava V

-Srivatsava V

Naveen's picture

Trees Welcome, But Must Be Planted Thoughtfully


You mentioned elsewhere about comfort for pedestrians under shady trees along pavements. I would add motorists also to this - I'm quite certain that they also enjoy shade along streets on which they drive, especially during hot climate. The benefits of trees in urban jungles is well established, no doubt & trees are always a welcome sight.

However, broken down, uneven sidewalks & tree roots obstructing walkways & spreading out to driveways or streets can pose risks to pedestrians & motorists alike. These huge, beautiful trees were planted several decades ago when these levels of growth & motorization were never anticipated.

Thus, some of them may need to be removed to ensure safety for all, unfortunate as it is. The only option is to plant new ones in place of old ones in a systematically planned manner, ensuring that they do not pose obstacles to pedestrians & road users alike in the future (learn from past mistakes !).

In cities such as Singapore, Al Ain & Dubai (UAE), greening has been done scientifically in such a manner that greenery stays well clear of pathways & driveways. Of course, these greening efforts are much more recent compared to Bangalore, & were much better planned on their much wider streets.

Whilst there is no doubt that we need to retain as many of our old trees as possible, large scale developments such as Metro are bound to uproot some of them.

I think it would be much wiser if we fought to ensure that alternate measures such as scientific planting of new trees is carried out & in much larger numbers for each tree that must be uprooted. Change & development cannot be halted. Sad as it is, some of our beloved trees will need to be removed.

BTW, the Metro website states that they have planted various types of trees in place of the ones being removed, but I was unable to find out locations where they had been planted. Does HU have any clue obout this ?

ssheragu's picture

metro (underground / overground)


(1) a lot has been said about trees cutting on Lal Bagh and I am fully with HU in not cutting trees (I think I even signed a petition for that) 

(2) I have a few suggetsions 

(3) Since there are so many opinions,  my humble advice is to construct that part of the Metro which runs underground, first , on priority and get feedback from the public for underground metro

(4) Subsequently, if the public feels that underground metro is more useful, less in creating problems on the ground or over it & more aesthetic, I strongly feel that we should plan to have the entire metro running underground even it means high cost. 

(5) This way the trees in Lal Bagh will be spared

(6) Also for the present, all construction in respect of overground metro can be temporarily stopped, until the underground part is complete.

(7) Further I only hope that the metro which runs underground is completley undergroud and not partly underground and overground (though it may not be similar to metros in most cities)


many thanks


Srinath Heragu comment guidelines

Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!

about seo | forum